Monday, July 13, 2009

Defendant's motion for attorneys' fees -- following its successful motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction -- was granted in part. "As the court noted in its prior Order, [plaintiff] neglected to contact higher management to verify something as basic as the ownership of the patent on which it was going to bring suit. Here, [plaintiff's] assertion that 'counsel saw no reason, and had no duty, to question or further investigate the ownership of the . . . patent' is simply wrong. . . . The court finds that the conduct of [plaintiff] and its counsel was negligent and manifestly unreasonable, which resulted in frivolous litigation."

Navigation

Rubin Anders

About This Blog

reads every patent infringement litigation docket sheet in the US district courts every day. The posts you see here are a small sampling of the Docket Report...see every noteworthy event in current patent litigation, complete with free links to the underlying orders, by subscribing to the Docket Report daily newsletter.